EUGENE -- The University of Oregon has agreed that its football coaches committed at least one major violation related to the NCAA's ongoing investigation into the Ducks' recruiting practices from 2008 to 2011. As a result, the university has proposed to self-impose a two-year probation for the football program and a reduction of one scholarship for each of the next three seasons.

Oregon and the NCAA, however, reached an impasse late in 2012 while attempting to agree on the severity of one violation concerning the Ducks' $25,000 payment to Texas-based talent scout Willie Lyles. The Ducks believe the impermissible "oral reports" delivered from Lyles constitute a secondary violation; NCAA enforcement officials believe them to be another "major violation."

Monday evening, the university released 515 pages of documents to The Oregonian -- which were requested in December -- shedding more light in the continuing saga surrounding the Ducks' hiring Lyles and other recruiting services.

In a summary disposition memorandum dated Oct. 30, 2012, and signed by UO president Michael Gottfredson and athletic director Rob Mullens, Oregon agreed "that this case is major in nature."

The university released a statement Monday evening after the documents were released. "The review is ongoing until the NCAA Committee on Infractions issues its final report," the statement read. "The integrity of the process and our continued full cooperation with the NCAA prohibits us from publicly discussing the specifics of this matter."

Most violations laid out in the summary disposition memos occurred during the tenure of former coach Chip Kelly, who left in January to coach the NFL's Philadelphia Eagles.

Oregon and the NCAA disagree on the severity of "Finding No. 2" in the summary disposition. As regulated by NCAA Bylaw 13.14.3, a recruiting service such as Lyles' Complete Scouting Services is required to provide subscribers -- in this case, Oregon -- with written quarterly updates. UO agreed in summary disposition with the NCAA that it improperly used three recruiting or scouting services, Elite Scouting Services, New Level Athletics and Complete Scouting Services between 2008-2010 by accepting oral reports on players when only written reports and videos are permitted.

Oregon's ties with Lyles go back to 2008.

The NCAA noted that it wasn't until Feb. 22, 2011, that Lyles, then the owner of Complete Scouting Services, made "a rushed attempted to assist" Oregon in fulfilling the NCAA requirements with "outdated" recruiting materials. The $25,000 cost isn't the primary issue for the NCAA. "Rather, the violations result from the receipt of the oral reports and the fact that CSS did not disseminate the quarterly reports as required by the legislation."

Because of Lyles' connection with Oregon, the NCAA considered him a "booster" for the Ducks. Oregon coaches, in interviews with NCAA enforcement officials, "described and considered Lyles to be a 'human GPS' rather than 'assisting in the recruitment of prospects' when Lyles was visiting the high schools at the same time."

"There is no information," according to the NCAA, "in the record that Lyles coerced or directed any prospect to ultimately choose Oregon. That said, Lyles did provide a meaningful recruiting advantage by orally providing background information about prospects to the coaching staff and also by serving as a conduit to facilitate communication with prospective student-athletes."

Oregon first came under NCAA scrutiny in March 2011 when reports surfaced that the football program had spent $25,000 on a national recruiting package from Lyles and CSS in 2010, shortly after highly-recruited running back Lache Seastrunk signed a letter of intent with Oregon. Lyles had a mentoring relationship with Seastrunk.

It subsequently was revealed that the Houston-based Lyles functioned as a mentor or advisor for a number of Oregon players from Texas, including LaMichael James, Tra Carson, Dontae Williams and Marcus Davis.

"The enforcement staff, institutions and involved individuals agree that the findings constitute a major infractions case," according to a summary disposition overview dated Oct. 30, 2012. "Football staff members were not aware that the manner in which they were using scouting/recruiting services was impermissible. Nonetheless, the recruiting advantage that was gained via the oral reports from scouting services personnel was more than the minimal."